Defendant's motion to transfer venue was granted and the court rejected plaintiff's argument that a mandatory stay pending resolution of an ITC investigation precluded the court from ruling on the transfer motion. "[Defendant] argues that the motion to transfer does not fall under the purview of 28 U.S.C. § 1659(a) because the motion does not address a 'claim' or 'same issue' involved in the ITC proceeding. The Court agrees with [defendant's] interpretation of the statute. It would make little sense for the stay to encompass proceedings related to procedural matters that are not before the ITC. The legislative history of § 1659 shows that Congress intended that the stay affect merits issues that involve 'questions of patent validity, infringement, and any defenses that might be raised in both proceedings.'"
Microsoft Corporation v. TiVo Inc., 2-11-cv-00134 (WAWD May 19, 2011, Order) (Martinez, J.)